The Eternal Disappearance of the '0.400 Hitter' Nailed by AI [AI Error Notes]

No More ".400 Hitters":
How Improved Skills and Reduced Standard Deviation Changed the Game
The "Paradox of Skill" Deepens in the AI Era

Editor's NoteExamining failures is the shortcut to success. 'AI Wrong Answer Notes' explores failure cases related to AI products, services, companies, and individuals.

The "0.400 hitter" has disappeared from baseball. One of the greatest hitters in baseball history, Ted Williams, recorded a .406 batting average in Major League Baseball (MLB) in 1941. After Josh Gibson hit .400 in 1943, no player has achieved a .400 batting average in over 150 years of MLB history.

Is it because today's hitters are less skilled? No. Evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould analyzed it this way.

"The reason 0.400 hitters disappeared in MLB is not due to a decline in players' skills.
Rather, it is because of the overall improvement in players' abilities and the reduction in standard deviation."

With the development and evolution of various pitching techniques, including weight training and basic physical conditioning, pitchers have become stronger. Defensive tactics have become more sophisticated and precise. Moreover, data analysis has greatly improved the ability to identify opponents' weaknesses compared to the past. In other words, as pitchers and defenders improved and baseball became more specialized overall, the skill gap among players narrowed, making extreme performances (like a .400 batting average) difficult to achieve.

Why Baseball Has More Comebacks Than Tennis or Baduk

Evolutionary biologist and baseball fan Stephen Jay Gould analyzes the disappearance of .400 hitters in his book Full House. Photo by Getty Images Bank

A similar phenomenon appears when comparing sports. In some sports, if you are skilled enough, you rarely lose.

In tennis or Baduk (or chess), upsets are rare when top world-class players face mid-level players. In chess, if the ELO rating difference is about 200 points, the higher-ranked player’s expected winning probability is approximately 75%. Tennis and Baduk are relatively less influenced by luck and are considered sports where skill largely determines the outcome.

Michael J. Mauboussin, adjunct professor at Columbia Business School, defined this phenomenon as the "paradox of skill." It means "when everyone's skill improves, the influence of luck increases."

The Variable Called AI: What If Everything Becomes Standardized?

The paradox of skill becomes an even more exquisite paradox in the AI era.

AI is driving the leveling up of products, technologies, and services. As AI technology spreads rapidly, once-innovative technologies have become common foundations easily accessible to everyone.

China’s AI startup DeepSeek has recently gained popularity for providing "affordable and high-performance AI." Various startups and local governments are incorporating "cheap and good AI" into their service improvements.

The emergence of affordable, high-performance AI and its continued spread are transforming industries. Even fields with large technological gaps are seeing a reduction in skill differences. In other words, the relative importance of luck or other factors is increasing. The translation service industry is a representative example.

Once, outstanding human translators dominated competitors with unmatched skills. But now, machine translation (AI translation) tools have become widespread. Since neural machine translation (NMT) systems like Google Translate and DeepL became common, post-editing?where AI drafts translations and humans only proofread?has emerged as a major industry.

Now, even ordinary translators can easily produce translation drafts comparable to the highest level with AI assistance. From the perspective of those using (purchasing) translations, anyone can affordably outsource AI translation. As a result, the quality gap in translations has narrowed, making differentiation difficult.

The Paradox of Skill: If Everyone Is Excellent... The Influence of 'Luck' Increases

LTCM was founded by John Meriwether, a famous bond trader at Salomon Brothers. Renowned scholars, including Professor Myron Scholes, who won the Nobel Prize in Economics, also joined as partners, gaining enthusiastic popularity at the time.

Thus, while AI adoption brings overall improvements in technology and skill, paradoxically, it makes it harder for individual companies or people to secure a relative advantage.

If everyone uses AI, it becomes the baseline, no longer a differentiating factor. In the past, those who were a step ahead in technology took everything; now, having technology is just the starting line.

Ultimately, different strategies are needed to get ahead. And in such situations, misunderstanding the influence of luck can lead to major mistakes.

'Then Should We Try to Control Luck?' The Trap of This Thought

Moving dice. Getty Images Bank

Since technology has leveled up, one might think to control "luck." The reasoning is that if skills are similar, managing luck properly will lead to success. However, this is a very dangerous thought. There is a notorious example in financial history.

In the 1990s, the legendary Wall Street hedge fund LTCM (Long-Term Capital Management) was led by Nobel laureates who ambitiously aimed to outperform the market with sophisticated mathematical models. They thoroughly analyzed past data to predict and avoid risks. They recorded tremendous returns, showing an astonishing annual rate close to 40% in the first few years.

But in 1998, the unexpected Russian sovereign default triggered a rapid change. Because extreme market fluctuations were not considered, losses snowballed quickly, and within just three months, they suffered billions of dollars in losses and were pushed to the brink of bankruptcy. Ultimately, Wall Street banks gathered to inject billions of dollars to barely rescue LTCM and prevent a global financial system collapse.

They mistakenly believed that advanced financial engineering could perfectly manage luck and risk, but reality was different. LTCM’s supercomputers had limited data and were helpless against unforeseen variables.

The same applies to corporate management. Strategies that underestimate or ignore the realm of luck?that is, uncertainty?can collapse instantly. There are always uncontrollable external factors in the world, and in an era where AI reduces technological gaps, even small variables can have a big impact.

Securing excellent technology and capabilities is important. However, as sports show, even the best can lose on a bad luck day in a contest between the best, so consideration of uncertainty is necessary.

The Changed Equation of 'Technology and Luck' in the AI Era: David and Goliath

An AI-generated image created upon the command to draw five stones placed on a hand. DALL·E 3

The competitive stage has now transformed into a baseball field where unpredictable outcomes unfold. In an era where AI deepens the "paradox of skill," how should we handle "luck"?

As noted earlier, the idea of "controlling luck" is arrogance. Instead, a strategy that acknowledges and leverages luck is needed. The biblical story of "David and Goliath" offers a hint.

In ancient Israel, the armies of Israel and the Philistines faced off in the Valley of Elah. The Philistine giant warrior Goliath was over 2 meters tall and wore thick armor. He seemed invincible.

"I will defeat Goliath!"

One day, a young shepherd boy named David stepped forward to fight Goliath. The king of Israel gave David his armor and sword. But the armor was too heavy for the boy.

Here, David made a crucial strategic choice. He threw off the ill-fitting armor and instead chose the shepherd’s tools he was familiar with as weapons: five smooth stones picked up from the stream.

Professor Mauboussin explains David’s choice as follows.

"There is a simple way to tilt luck in your favor in competitive situations.
If you are the stronger party, simplify the game.
Conversely, if you are the weaker party, complicate the game."

David instinctively knew he had no chance in a direct strength confrontation. That was a game favorable to Goliath. So David decided not to follow the game rules that favored Goliath. When Goliath mocked and approached David, David ran and threw stones. One stone hit Goliath’s forehead precisely, and the giant fell. When David cut off Goliath’s head with his sword, history was rewritten.

An image generated by AI depicting the story of David and Goliath from the Bible in a simple manner. DALL·E 3

In a market where technological differentiation is difficult, Mauboussin emphasizes that companies must follow this "David strategy." Instead of competing like giant corporations, they should redefine the rules of the game through disruptive innovation and new business models. Also, in an era of technological leveling, the speed of response and ability to set direction are core competencies. Agility to change strategy like David is essential.

Finally, it is important to remember that luck and skill are not opposing concepts but complementary. Fortune favors the prepared. One must prepare technology and skills sufficiently and then ride the flow of luck. Build a solid foundation with skill, acknowledge luck, and change the game with flexibility and agility. This is how to minimize failure in the era of technological leveling brought by AI.